SC: No place for sexist-language in the judiciary

Noting that some of the official documents, communications, and issuances of the Judiciary still use sexist language, the High Court issued on September 24, 2021 Memorandum Circular No. 90-2021 reminding and enjoining all the officials and employees of the Judiciary to use gender fair language.

Memorandum Circular No. 90-2021 reiterated Administrative Circular No. 82-2006 which the Supreme Court issued to adopt Civil Service Commission (CSC) Memorandum Circular No. 12, Series of 2005 on the use of non-sexist language in all official documents, communications, and issuances of the government. Chief Justice Alexander G. Guismundo underscored that the use of sexist language is still prevalent in the judiciary even after the adoption of the CSC circular.

“Some of the official documents, communications, and issuances of the Judiciary still use sexist language despite the seminars and modules, and distribution of manuals and materials to court officials and personnel that consistently advocated the use of gender-fair language,” CJ Guismundo wrote in the memorandum order.

“Language is a very essential tool in communication. It articulates consciousness, reflects culture, and affects socialization. Hence, the need to recognize the importance of transforming language from traditional usage to a more liberating one, that which is gender sensitive,” Former Chairman Constantino-David wrote in the CSC circular.

The use of non- sexist language, according to the memorandum order, is to avoid implicit and explicit discriminatory language against women or men. In the reiterated and adopted CSC circular, former Chairperson Katrina Constantino-David of the CSC stated that the move to the use of gender sensitive language is in line with the government's efforts to integrate women's concerns in its plans and programs through the years.

In fine, the officials and employees of the judiciary were reminded and encouraged that, among others, masculine pronouns “him,” “he,” and “his” should be substituted by “them,” “who,” and articles “a,” “an,” and “the,” whichever is applicable; words “brotherhood,” “fraternity,” and “salesman,” should be substituted by words “kinship,” “solidarity,” and “sales agent;” and phrases “founding father” and “director’s girl Friday” should be substituted by phrases “founder or founding leader,” and “director’s assistant,” respectively.

“What is wrong with words like “brotherhood,” “fraternity,” and “salesman,” and phrases like “founding father” and “director’s girl Friday” and other similar words and phrases in written documents in the judiciary and other government offices? They are “sexist” words and phrases and should be discouraged in official documents, communications and issuances in the judiciary,” CJ Gesmundo added.